Author
Topic: De Gloria Olivae and the next Pope. (Read 47560 times)

Interesting... I've seen a number of webpages which include writings that interpret St Malachy's prophecies concerning the next Pope in the same way. Here's a quote from the following page:This is why the Pope, as the inspirer for this communication system, has the duty to lead the movement of reunification of the religions - in their essence not in their symbols or their expression of faith. Previous Popes have started to create bridges, such as John XXIII and John Paul II, but much remains to be done until religion can no more be a pretext for destruction and death. The next Pope, “De Gloria Olivae”, is the man who will achieve this task and bring the Revelation.

The same prophecy states that there will be another Pope after "Gloria D'Olivae", called "Petrus Romanus", and then it's the End of the World (or End of the See of St. Peter).

However, "De Gloria Olivae" means "FROM THE GLORY OF THE OLIVES". We should recall that the Order of St. Benedict is also known as the Olivertan Order, and the specific Order often takes pride in a great Pope coming from this Order shortly before the End of the World. Therefore, I believe this man will be a Benedictine Monk, and this is what St. Malachy actually meant with De Gloria Olivage. It should be clear in 20-30 days. One case doesn't exclude the other, since it might be a double prophesy, as the case was with some in the past.

Malachy O'Morgair, Archbishop of Armagh, was born in 1094 and died in 1148. He is not an Orthodox saint, and his prophecies are not part of the Orthodox tradition.

Truth has been known to find its ways outside the borders of the visible Orthodox Church.

I do not deny this.

I just think it is worthy to warn Orthodox Christian readers that we are not talking about an Orthodox Saint, but about a Roman Catholic hierarch. Hence any Orthodox Christian can freely evaluate his authority.

Personally, I've read a few things about this subject that made me think that this prophecy is most probably a forgery. It was said to be written before 1143 and supposedly hidden in the Vatican archives during more than four centuries; so it was first published in 1595. But it is striking that virtually all the popes mentioned before 1595 (the publication date) are called by titles that make direct and obvious reference to their names (baptism, family or cardinal names), religious order or coat of arms, while after 1595 this regular association disappears almost utterly. The correspondence between the title and the respective pope becames much more enigmatic and metaphoric; almost none of the titles bears any resemblance with elements of the Pope's name or coat of arms.

Besides that, it was also noted that the author of the prophecy made precisely the same errors of the XVI-century historian Onuphrius Panvinius. For instance: Panvinius wrote that Eugene IV was a Celestinian priest (when actually he was Augustinian). The title prescribed to him is Lupa coelestina. Panvinius also wrote that John XXII was son of a shoemaker (what is not true). So his title in the prophecy is De sutore Osseo (Of the cobbler of Osseo). This pattern is exactly what one could expect if a XVI-century charlatan decided to write a fake prophecy based solely in the historical work of his contemporary Onuphrius Panvinius.

Actually, while looking at cardinal candidates for the See of St. Peter, I found 2 who studied in a Benedictine Order, and one who was a complete monk in St. Benedict's Order, but I seem to have lost the URL to the site...

St. Malachy's prophesies have been true till now, or at least we managed to persuade ourselves they are true by giving each Pope a trait that suits his phrase.

Paul Augustin Cardinal Mayer OSB is the only cardinal who is a Benedictine, however he is over 80 and ineligible for the conclave. It is highly unlikely any cardinal outside the conclave will be elected.

"or at least we managed to persuade ourselves they are true by giving each Pope a trait that suits his phrase."

My church doesn't really have a word on the issue, does she? As far as I know, my Church says Catholics burn in Hell :flame: and are by no means Saints...

The prophecies could be considered fake by the Roman Catholic Church, but this could be for protective reasons, no? I mean, if they accepted Malachy's prophecies as real, and thye didn't turn out to be true, how ridiculed would they become?

Other than that, does someone know the historical background of how these "prophecies"? How they came to light?

As far as I know, my Church says Catholics burn in Hell and are by no means Saints...

And if this, therefore, is the case, then any so-called prophecy by any post-schism saints of the Roman Catholic Church should not even enter into your radar, let alone leave you fretting about their viability.

Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen

Perhaps we're rushing a bit too much to judge the prophecy of St. Malachy wrong? What proof is there that this is a charlatan's work, and not real prophecy (not necessarily from God...)?

Well, there is a field of education in reading and understanding old manuscripts or writings called "Paleography" that can find clues if something is a fake. Some points are: How old is the paper/parchment? "Does the ink fit the technology of the purported time of writing? Is the scrpt/print/writing the kind that was done when this is supposed to have been written or not? (as a f'rinstance if some old paper was found with a type script that was known ot have been designed at a later date, the writings would not be from the date of the paper). Are there similarites in errors, mistakes, wordings with other works that might show that there was copying.

Generally we don't do that either. It's really God's decision all the way around. Actually, we believe that the Faithful will be judged harsher than those outside the Church, and Priests and Bishops even harsher yet.

The Catholic Church has not condemned the Prophecies of Malachy. Neither have they approved them. No matter what happens we ought to grow in holiness. We ought to strive more and more everyday to Grow in God's Grace. Everyday we are closer to the end, our end, or the last judgment. If we allow ourselves to embrace God and hold nothing back, we will be just fine.

Just my guess:If the Churches manage to unite during this Pope's period, then the next Pope will be the Gloria De Olivae. If is generally the cause of peace around the world, then we would also rush to say that he's the Glory of the Olive.

But then again, if the new Pope comes from Italy or Spain or any other Meditteranean country, he could be the glory of the Olives.

The motto is far too general to be applied on a Pope. Considering Pope John Paul II was also a champion of Peace, he was also Gloria De Olivae. And many other Popes before him, who were champions of peace. St. Malachy's prophecy is most likely a collection of cunningly used mottos that we can apply to any Pope on the throne.

And then again, if all these fail, we can always come up with ideas about, let's say... how he loves olives, or something else equally suitable.

Ntinos, you got it. This alleged prophecy can clearly be divided in two sections: before and after 1595 -- the year of its publication.

Almost all the mottos of the first section are quite accurate and obvious references to the Popes' names, religious orders or coats of arms. The exactness and objectivity of this first section is the reason of the popularity of Malachy's (or the pseudo-Malachy's) prophecy.

But the mottos of the second section are written in a completely different fashion. They are too vague, general and sibylline, much like the horoscopes you can find in your local newspaper. They almost never bear any resemblance with those same elements of identification so constantly stressed in the first section (name or coat of arms). The interpreters of the second section of the prophecy need to refer to the "general meaning" of each pontificate, or to casual details of the Pope's biography -- and they almost never need to do this when they interpret the mottos of the first section, because their interpretation is too easy. But these mottos of the second section are so general that you could apply virtually any of them to any Pope of the second section, and you would still find "valid" interpretations -- much like you could also succeed if you tried to apply today's newspaper horoscope of any sign to any person.

Regarding the historical background of these prophecies: according to my sources (a book in Portuguese by a Roman Catholic priest that does not believe in them), they were first published in 1595 at Venice by a Benedictine monk, Arnold Wion of Douai, as part of his book Lignum Vitae, Ornamentum et Decor Ecclesiae. Monk Arnold does not mention where did he found them, where were the original manuscripts, which evidence did he had that their author was indeed the Archbishop Malachy of Armagh, etc. He simply states: Malachy "is said to have written a few booklets, but by him I do not know but a prophecy regarding the Sovereign Pontiffs. As it is short and was never printed before, I copy it here, in order to satisfy the desire of many". That's all we know about the historical background of this prophecy.

Given our lack of knowledge regarding the origins of the text and the features of composition, with the striking division of the text in two sections utterly different in style (and even the presence, in the first section, of the same errors and inaccuracies that one could find in the work of a XVI-century historian of the papacy, well known by his contemporaries), it seems likely that it is a forgery -- by Monk Arnold or any other person -- written short before 1595. It seems that they were not actually written by Malachy, let alone they are real prophecies.

Very good post, Felipe. It's a matter of reading with discernment; looking at changes in style or wording. Not all words in print/writing are equal.

(And definitely just because something is posted on a website, it isn't automatically reliable. check to find out who's putting up the site. Where are they coming from, as it were. Why would someone be promulgating the "Prophecy" of St.Malachy? )

Ebor

Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- A longtime theologian and author, Portuguese Cardinal Jose da Cruz Policarpo of Lisbon is seen as an outside candidate for pope -- a possible bridge candidate between Europe and Latin America, where Portuguese and Spanish are the two main languages.

For most of his priesthood the 69-year-old cardinal has been associated with seminary formation and with the Portuguese Catholic University, where he taught and later was rector.

Even after becoming patriarch of Lisbon in 1998, his close ties with the university continued because the office automatically makes him grand chancellor of the university.

He is one of only three Latin-rite bishops in Europe with the title of patriarch and the only one outside Italy. The other two are the patriarch of Venice and, when a new one is elected, the pope -- whose titles include "patriarch of the West."

Cardinal Policarpo has written several books, including "St. Bernard and Marian Theology" and "An Ethical Order for Peace," and is the author of numerous articles in theological journals. His writings cover a range of issues from Marian spirituality -- reflecting the Portuguese devotion to Our Lady of Fatima -- to the moral and spiritual challenges of modern society and the role of the church in civil society and culture.

His interest in contemporary questions of faith was evident even in the late 1960s when, as a young priest doing graduate studies at Rome's Gregorian University, he defended a thesis on the theology of non-Christian religions and a subordinate paper on "The Signs of the Times."

As head of the Portuguese bishops' conference since 1999, he has been outspoken in the defense of democracy and respect for human rights in the former Portuguese colonies of East Timor and Mozambique.

Born Feb. 26, 1936, in Alvorninha, Portugal, Jose da Cruz Policarpo has been a priest since 1961 and a bishop since 1978. He became patriarch of Lisbon in 1998 and a cardinal in 2001.

He studied for the priesthood at the minor seminaries of Santarem and Almada and completed his theological studies at Christ the King Seminary in Olivais.

Following ordination he was sent to Rome for further studies at Gregorian University, where he earned his licentiate in dogmatic theology in 1968.

From 1963 to 1968 he also taught and served as vice rector at the minor seminary in Penafirme, Portugal.

In 1970 he began teaching at the Portuguese Catholic University and simultaneously serving as rector of the Olivais seminary.

In the Coptic Church, a diocesan bishop cannot be elected as Patriarch. I guess the idea is that a bishop is "married" to his diocese for life. Therefore, in the past, almost all Patriarchs were selected from the ranks of the monastics or even (but much more rarely) from the laity.

This recently changed when the late Pope Kyrillos VI started the practice of "general" bishops, those that were ordained not for a diocese but rather for a specific service or function for the churcb as a whole. Examples include a general bishop for youth sevrices, social services, education, etc...

HH Pope Shenouda III was a general bishop of education and it was determined that his nomination to become patriarch was not in violation of previous church practice of not ordaining a diocesan bishop.

My question to those familiar with RC conclave is this....is it possible for a monk to be elected as Pope? I realize that it is probably unlikely but what are the actual rules?

In Christ,Raouf

Logged

Flog your enemies with the Name of Jesus and let the remembrance of Jesus be present with each breath. - St. John Climacus

Realistically and based on the 1996 Apostolic Constitution "Universi Dominici Gregis" issued by Pope John Paul II and on the Codes of Canons (for East and West) of the Catholic Church, that person must at least be a priest because of the necessity of episcopal ordination upon his acceptance of election to canonically exercise the office of Roman(=Supreme) Pontiff.

If history and tradition are considered, the next Pope should be a Cardinal (Latin Rite or Eastern Rite), most probably from among the 115 Cardinals (3 are Eastern rite) allowed into concalve this Monday, April 18th. ( 2 conclave Cardinals: Cardinal Sin, retired Archbishop of Manila, and Cardinal Rivera, retired Archbishop of Monterrey, Mexico, will not be attending the conclave due to failing health.)

The last non-Cardinal who was elected Pope was Urban VI, the then Archbishop of Acerenza (Kingdom of Naples), who was Supreme Pontiff from 1378 through his death in 1389.

As most of you have already pointed out, any Catholic can be elected pope. It's not even required to be a priest - although that wouldn't happen in today's age.

As a former Catholic who studied for the priesthood (I have a very good seminary priest friend who is an assitant to Cardinal Lustiger), and as an Orthodox convert, I can only say that the prophecies of Malachy, whatever their origin or age, are in some cases astonishingly accurate. In Orthodoxy and Catholicism, however, private revelations carry absolutely no weight whatsoever. Scipture and Tradition are our sources of revelation. As long as we keep this in mind, I think we can rest assured we are safe. With regard to the prophecy of the most recent pope "De labore solis" (from the toil of the sun) it is fascinating that the day he was elected and the day he was buried were both days of solar eclipse. In the middle ages, most had no idea what caused a solar eclipse - they thought the sun was "working hard" in some manner - hence, perhaps, the description. Another fascinating recent pope, Pius IX had the description "Crux de Cruce" - cross from a cross. This is possibly one of the most astonishingly accurate ones. Pius IX suffered tremendous affronts from Victor Emmanuel, of the House of Savoy, who stole the papal states and tried to establish an Italian monarchy. Most of Pius IX's pontificate was spent fighting this battle, and Pius IX called it his "cross". Interestingly, the coat of arms of the House of Savoy bears a large white cross. "Cross from a cross" couldn't have been more descriptive of this pope.

While as an Orthodox believer I disagree strongly with the twists that Catholicism has placed on the athority of the pope, purgatory, indulgences and even their "transactional" approach to sin and the sacraments, we still ackowledge him as the Bishop of Rome. I personally hope one day they will recognise that a full return to Orthodoxy could solve most of their problems - from priestly celibacy to episcopal collegiallity, but that's unlikely any time soon. If you have a chance to read the documents of the Second Vatican Council, it reads like a strong attempt to return to Orthodox roots. Unfortunately, it ended up being nothing more than a capitulation to protestantism. Let's hope that "De gloria olivae" brings his church back to its Orthodox roots.

If you're following the prophecy of Malachy (or whoever made it up), it would point to the only Jewish cardinal - Lustiger. Lustiger also taught at an Olivetan school at one time, I believe. My guess is that it will be someone that isn't even on the "papabile" list - a dark horse that nobody even knows well. We'll soon know!

Aren't you glad that we don't go through this brain damage in Orthodoxy?

I can only say that the prophecies of Malachy, whatever their origin or age, are in some cases astonishingly accurate. In Orthodoxy and Catholicism, however, private revelations carry absolutely no weight whatsoever. Scipture and Tradition are our sources of revelation. As long as we keep this in mind, I think we can rest assured we are safe. With regard to the prophecy of the most recent pope "De labore solis" (from the toil of the sun) it is fascinating that the day he was elected and the day he was buried were both days of solar eclipse. In the middle ages, most had no idea what caused a solar eclipse - they thought the sun was "working hard" in some manner - hence, perhaps, the description. Another fascinating recent pope, Pius IX had the description "Crux de Cruce" - cross from a cross. This is possibly one of the most astonishingly accurate ones. Pius IX suffered tremendous affronts from Victor Emmanuel, of the House of Savoy, who stole the papal states and tried to establish an Italian monarchy. Most of Pius IX's pontificate was spent fighting this battle, and Pius IX called it his "cross". Interestingly, the coat of arms of the House of Savoy bears a large white cross. "Cross from a cross" couldn't have been more descriptive of this pope.

Though I believe some of his theologies to be Judiazing, this pope is certainly not a Jew, infact he was a member of the Hitler Youth.

At at time when such membership was compulsory for every German youth, and he got out very quickly because he was enrolled at seminary. His father was a virulent anti-Nazi who had to move the family a number of times due to his activities. By your logic, every German who is in his late 70s is a Jew-hater because, for 99.9% of them, they were, at some point, members of the Hitler Youth.

What theologies do you find to be "Judaizing"? I can understand your opposition to probably most of what Cardinal Ratzinger believes theologically, but I cannot for the life of me understand what you can find to be "Judaizing".

Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen

Though I believe some of his theologies to be Judiazing, this pope is certainly not a Jew, infact he was a member of the Hitler Youth.

Apparently there was a Bishop Lustiger of Paris, who was a convert from Judaism, I read he just retired... His name I think got mixed up with Cardinal Rastinger... who is German and who's bio is noted on one of the above posts...Anyhow, I was confused by the two names..maybe others are too.In XC, Kizzy

I think everyone should direct their attention to the name of the new pope Benedict XVI and what Ntinos post wrote "De Gloria Olivae" means "FROM THE GLORY OF THE OLIVES". We should recall that the Order of St. Benedict is also known as the Olivertan Order,Well his name is Benedict. Is this not spooking anyone else?

What theologies do you find to be "Judaizing"? I can understand your opposition to probably most of what Cardinal Ratzinger believes theologically, but I cannot for the life of me understand what you can find to be "Judaizing".

I was making an (admitedly cryptic) reference to the issue of azymes.

('Whosoever says that our Lord Jesus Christ at the Mystical Last Supper used unleavened bread as do the Hebrews and not leavened bread, that is, raised bread, let him be far from us and under the anathema as one who thinks like a Jew and as one who introduces the doctrines of Appolinarios and of the Armenians into our Church, on which account let him be anathematized a second time.' --Third Anathema of the Endemousa Synod at Constantinople in 1583)

Deacon Lance,I was actually just making a statement to set it at contrast with the claim that he was a Jew...as desparate as the Nazis were for manpower, they did not knowingly admited Jews into the ranks of the Hitler Youth. Ratzinger has enough Ecclesiological, Theological, Christological, and Phenomenological problems to criticize without being too concerned with his political preferences...infact I would be far less concerned if he was a loyal Nazi but held to the Orthodox Faith; social politics are generally superficial things relative to issues of the Faith.

"The article also classifies Ratzinger as a "theological anti-Semite" for believing in Jesus so strongly that - gasp! - he thinks that everyone, even Jews, should accept him as the messiah.

To all this we should say, "This is news?!"As the Sunday Times article admits, Ratzinger's membership in the Hitler Youth was not voluntary but compulsory; also admitted are the facts that the cardinal - only a teenager during the period in question - was the son of an anti-Nazi policeman, that he was given a dispensation from Hitler Youth activities because of his religious studies, and that he deserted the German army."

And from farther down:

"If he were truly a Nazi sympathizer, then it would undoubtedly have become evident during the past 60 years. Yet throughout his service in the church, Ratzinger has distinguished himself in the field of Jewish-Catholic relations.

As prefect of the Doctrine of the Faith, Ratzinger played an instrumental role in the Vatican's revolutionary reconciliation with the Jews under John Paul II. He personally prepared Memory and Reconciliation, the 2000 document outlining the church's historical "errors" in its treatment of Jews. And as president of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, Ratzinger oversaw the preparation of The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible, a milestone theological explanation for the Jews' rejection of Jesus.

If that's theological anti-Semitism, then we should only be so lucky to "suffer" more of the same.

As for the Hitler Youth issue, not even Yad Vashem has considered it worthy of further investigation. Why should we?"

If anyone wants to read all of the piece, but not register for the Jerusalem Post: google on Jerusalem Post Ratzinger and then hit "Cached" on the Breaking News April 17, 2005 (it was the first link under the JP main page provided when I searched)

One would *hope* that this will put "Paid" to accusations of Nazi ties..... but it probably won't. Or am I just being cynical? (No, because I *still* read people saying that Cantuar+ is a "pagan druid"... sigh.)

Ebor

Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis